Would you mind to explain how it guesses the MTU? I assume it's not per RFC1191...?
-- Ragge Derrick Brashear wrote: > We should probably scream this out a bit more; the unfortunate thing > is because of what it does to guess MTU, it's really easy to end up > with fragmented packets, and if your network configuration results in > fragments being dropped (and with clients at the edge, it's not likely > to be strongly under most cells' control) things get ugly fast. > > > On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Felix Frank <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, 9 Apr 2009, Derrick Brashear wrote: >> >> >>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Felix Frank <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've been busy doing a couple of stress tests lately. A disturbing >>>> finding >>>> is that the 1.4.7 fileserver achieves nearly 25% higher data throughput >>>> than >>>> 1.4.8 and 1.4.10 respectively. >>>> >>> My suspicion: force jumbograms to be on for your environment. >>> >>> The issue was they could not previously be turned off, regardless of >>> switch, due to a programming error in OpenAFS since 1.0. >>> >> Good call. The throughputs are identical after including -jumbo for 1.4.10. >> > > Derrick > _______________________________________________ > OpenAFS-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel > _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
